Carroll's Call

[shepard50]

I saw somewhere today that Lynch was 1/5 from the 1 yd line with two runs for losses. So there is that as well.

 

[NortheasternPJ]

 

[mwonow]

So, what you're saying is that God didn't want Russell Wilson to win.  And he's going to hell.

I laughed coffee all over the place. Literally!

 

[nattysez]

Nice piece by Kilgore on not calling a TO:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2015/02/02/bill-belichick-made-a-sneaky-smart-decision-that-might-have-contributed-to-fateful-play-call-by-pete-carroll/

 

[NortheasternPJ]

Nice piece by Kilgore on not calling a TO:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2015/02/02/bill-belichick-made-a-sneaky-smart-decision-that-might-have-contributed-to-fateful-play-call-by-pete-carroll/

 
According to The Gang Green, it actually wasn't a plan by Belichick. Belichick just gave up on the game like the big loser he is.

 

[FL4WL3SS]

I'm not sure how many people caught it, but I was watching highlights this morning for the millionth time and caught a quote by the OC of the Seahawks basically calling out Lockett for not trying hard enough to catch that ball.
 
Even if you think it, you don't say that nationally. Classless organization.

 

[BoneForYourJar]

Watching that last Seattle drive one thing that struck me was how at ease BB looks. I realize it's too easy for NE fans to default to the "genius" characterization, but damnit he sure does act like one there.

 

[Tony C]

 
I came here to post much the same thoughts - great summary.
 
Pete Carroll affirms his OC's pass call because "they're in their goal line D", but what he didn't see was that, yes, we were lined up press on everybody but we also had 3 CBs out there.  We didn't have the jumbo package out there.  You could call a stretch run and all Lynch needs to do is pick some step to cut back towards the goal line - I love our DBs but nobody is stopping Lynch from getting 1 yard there.  Or you call one of your zone-block option-cut runs - odds of getting stuffed in the backfield are miniscule without more LBs on the field to plug gaps.
 
Basically, Carroll mis-read the personnel we had, and that let him dictate the wrong play call for the situation.  It probably would still have worked 90% of the time, or at least fallen incomplete with no harm done.  But in that moment, he was outcoached.  And after the game, he still had no clue about it, insisting (kinda angrily) to anyone who'd listen that the Pats had "their goal-line defense" out there.  But not the one you were expecting, Pete.  Surprise!

 
As others have said, it's you who misread the personnel -- no safeties in the game. That's a great D against which to pass.
 

This is the key. Letting the clock run there was one of the most cold-blooded calls I have ever seen; it was not just "trusting his defense" -- it was creating the conditions so that passing had much more of a benefit to the Seahawks, diverting them from the otherwise optimal call. Carroll came out and admitted it -- they were going to "waste" the play, stop the clock, and get the personnel they wanted for two more runs, which they would have time to run. If they call their last TO there to get the personnel they want (as all the talking heads are saying they should have done), and the run doesn't make it -- now you are in trouble and may not have time to run a 4th down play, or, at least, you are throwing it in much more obvious throwing circumstances. Even if they ran it with the personnel they had (intending to call the TO immediately if he doesn't get in), your options are more constricted for those last two plays -- and you didn't run it with the personnel you wanted. I can't fault Carroll for wanting to get the most upside from each of the remaining downs -- and BB put him to that decision by giving up the chance of a last-30-seconds-drive-to-tie-it that was pretty tiny anyway. While it was going down my friend and I turned to each other and sort of shrugged in astonishment -- I knew there would be an explanation for why BB wasn't calling the TO, but I had no clue what it would be.  

 
Yeah, the whole BB was a genius not a fool for not calling a time-out thing is still puzzling to me, but I guess it comes down to two things vs one thing:
 
-he saw chaos on the Seattle side and decided there was no reason to restore their order.
-he knew that calling a time-out would mean that Seattle could run 3 times -- whereas without the TO they had to anticipate passing at least once out of the (possible) upcoming 3 plays.
-vs eliminating the possibility of the Pats driving for a game-tying FG.
 

I think that particular pattern is tougher for Wilson due to his height; a taller QB can throw 'downhill' and put the ball lower.

 
I agree, he played great and I think he's amazing -- but he's getting a pass on that play for some reason, and his height was a big part of why he threw it poorly.
 
 

In the football central chat I said something pretty similar to the OP.
 
By Belichick not calling a TO Seattle had to throw once, assuming they didn't score on the 2nd down. 
If they run on 2nd down the HAVE to throw on 3rd, and it has to be into the endzone.
 
As it was they had 11 personnel vs the goalline pats D, EVERYONE is thinking run it's actually a pretty smart play to throw here, esp knowing you cna throw underneath and if he's stopped short it's not the end of the world.
 
I'm not in love with the play call, you have to fake it and have some disguise (I don't think they did but I can't find a clip of it I can watch here right now) but frankly the play was just a great one by Butler. 
 
I like he didn't go with what everyone was thinking, and given Wilson's turnover history (which is great) you risk it, esp knowing if he doesn't see it he could throw it away or potentially scramble anyway. The look is pretty good, I think Wilson should have thrown it behind him more, so Butler couldn't get there, but I think end of the day the play CALL isn't bad, the credit should go to the Pats coaching for Butler clearly seeing the pay and the route, which means he was prepped and ready for it, and then he performed. I don't think it's an error for Carroll. IF that's a TD everyone is blowing him for the brave unexpected call. The Pats D just did a GREAT job defending a pass while expecting the run. Good for them. Great call Belichick for not taking the TO, which surprised (IMO) Seattle.

 
Yeah, that's well put. And a cut-and-paste from "Nat" from the FO comments, as I think he puts it well,  too.
 
 

by nat :: Mon, 02/02/2015 - 10:53am

One thing people seem to be missing about the final, fateful pass by WIlson is that Lynch had not been very successful on short yardage earlier in the game. He had been stuffed on 3 of 5 attempts (2 of 3 inside the ten). In this situation, with the Patriots forced to sell out against Lynch, he might have had a 1/3 chance of scoring.
If he had run and failed, Seattle would need to burn its last timeout, and then either throw a pass, run and risk the clock running out, or kick on third down for a little bit less than 50% chance of winning in OT. A pass play is most likely. Except this time the Patriots would be ready: Much riskier.
With a pass on second down, the Seahawks got to run the passing play in favorable circumstances. With the kind of pass called, the only thing bad that could happen was an interception. An incomplete would allow them another play with both the run and pass good options.
Too bad for them (and a great play by the Patriots) that Wilson threw the pick. But don't blame the call. It was gutsy, but it was playing for the best chance to win, based on how Lynch had done so far in the game.
Finding someone to blame is fun, in a shallow kind of way. But sometimes your team loses because the other team made one more great play than your guys did.

 

 

 
 

 
now that is hilarious.

 

[Marciano490]

Kick on third down to force OT? We were up by four...

 

[Carlos Cowart]

Seattle's last score was a TD pass at the end of the third on 2nd and goal. I don't hear many people calling that a stupid call.

 

[wiffleballhero]

I can watch Sherman's face change as he watches the play unfold all day.

 

[lexrageorge]

Not sure this is the right thread for this, but on Belichick's decision to not let Lynch score:
 
The Pats could only move the ball via the dink-and-dunk passing game (which they executed to perfection in the 4th quarter).  The chances of gaining the necessary 50 yards against one of the league's top secondaries would not be high.  And Belichick obviously felt better that his defense had a better chance of stopping Lynch in those goal line plays than they did against the Giants.  

 

[crystalline]

Seattle's last score was a TD pass at the end of the third on 2nd and goal. I don't hear many people calling that a stupid call.

Previous score was a pass too, just an inch away from 1st and goal-1st and 10 at the 11. That was the play that Matthews burned Ryan.
I didn't see the personnel there (was it a heavy package?).
But the goal line passes had worked the last two trips in.

 

[Gunfighter 09]

I'm not sure how many people caught it, but I was watching highlights this morning for the millionth time and caught a quote by the OC of the Seahawks basically calling out Lockett for not trying hard enough to catch that ball.
 
Even if you think it, you don't say that nationally. Classless organization.

 
 
Oh come on.  Carroll could not have been more stand up about this. Bevell sucks, and has probably officially capped his coaching career with both the playcall and by throwing Lockette under the bus. That is an individual thing, not on Carroll.  
 
Mike Silver once again proves that he is the best regular columnist who covers the NFL, writing this article covering a three hour text conversation that he had with Carroll: 
 

 
 
Carroll, with one remaining timeout, did the math and erred on the side of ensuring a maximum amount of chances to get the ball across the goal line, while limiting the chances that the Pats would have enough time to counter....."You could run on 2nd down, call timeout, have to throw on third and score, or incompletion and have to choose (run or pass) on the final down. That's ball logic, not 2nd guess logic... you never think you'll throw an interception there, just as you don't think you would fumble."..... "The logic and reasoning (of the second-and-1 pass) is why you throw a TD pass with six seconds left in the half," Carroll said. "You've trained your players to do the right thing, and I trust them to do right."

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000467707/article/seahawks-pete-carroll-explains-rationale-on-illfated-call
Someday, I want to see a full examination of the last five minutes of this game, two great drives by the two best coached teams in football trying to win the biggest game in the sport, ending in the most dramatic way possible. 
 
 
 
 

 

[canderson]

My explanation: Carroll is haunted by LenDale White's inability to gain 2 yards in a similar situation which would've iced the game.
 

 
\m/

 

[lambeau]

Barnwell on BB not calling timeout: "...downright baffling...Belichick's mind went blank at exactly the wrong moment."

 

[curly2]

I think you have to run Lynch on second down. If you're at the 3 or 4, pass, but they're at the 1. Give him the ball and if he doesn't make it, then you can run two passes.
 
And if you;re going to call a pass on second down, don't call THAT one. A one-yard slant at the goal line is bound to be thrown in tight quarters, which could yield a TD, a clean pick like what happened, a incompletion or a ball that's tipped and up for grabs. If you really don't want to run Lynch, roll Wilson right with three options: 1. Run it in if there's an opening: 2. Throw it if there's a receiver open of 3. If 1 and 2 aren't available, throw it into the fifth row.
 
GREAT play by Butler, though.

 

[Al Zarilla]

I thought, when he finally broke it down, Pete made a pretty good case for his decision. They had one time out. They want three chances to win the Super Bowl if they need all three of them. With one time out, you have two runs and one pass.

If you run on second down and don't get it, you have to call your last time out. Then you throw, because at that point you can't run with no time outs. And on fourth, you run. So, Carroll's decision was to pass on second down when everyone is expecting the run. That gives him his two runs and a pass but just in a different order. Not sure the pass was the pass you want. But his logic makes some sense the way he explained it.

The little things matter. The fact that the Kearse catch was confusing, you could say, probably won the game. The confusion wound down the play clock and Seattle had to use their second time out. That's probably the game, because with two time outs, Lynch gets three chances to get a yard.

I heard that explanation from Pete and also thought that it all made sense except there is too much negative thinking involved. He's thinking if I pass on second down and it's incomplete (negative #1), then I'll run on third, and if Lynch is short, I call timeout and have a fourth down still. The positive thinking play is just give it to beast mode, who is your best offensive player, and has 102 yards and 4.3 YPC for the night. That is even though in 5 rushes from the one all year he had only one TD (wasn't it?). That 1 in 5 was not last night, when he was not thrown for a loss once and he was held to no gain twice. Pete overthought the thing. Thank heavens he thinks so fast on his feet. Any other coach would have handed the ball to Lynch, and we most likely lose. 

 

[lexrageorge]

Barnwell on BB not calling timeout: "...downright baffling...Belichick's Barnwell's mind went blank at exactly the wrong moment."

 

[Gunfighter 09]

Barnacle provides some numbers context for the decision: 
 

 
Before Sunday, NFL teams had thrown the ball 108 times on the opposing team’s 1-yard line this season. Those passes had produced 66 touchdowns (a success rate of 61.1 percent, down to 59.5 percent when you throw in three sacks) and zero interceptions. The 223 running plays had generated 129 touchdowns (a 57.8 percent success rate) and two turnovers on fumbles.
Stretch that out to five years and the numbers make runs slightly superior; they scored 54.1 percent of the time and resulted in turnovers 1.5 percent of the time, while passes got the ball into the end zone 50.1 percent of the time and resulted in turnovers 1.9 percent of the time. In a vacuum, the decision between running and passing on the 1-yard line is hardly indefensible, because both the risk and the reward are roughly similar.

 
 
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/super-bowl-new-england-patriots-seattle-seahawks/

 

[Myt1]

Barnacle provides some numbers context for the decision: 
 
 
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/super-bowl-new-england-patriots-seattle-seahawks/

Except the Seahawks' stated reason for the play all was to run the clock down (which is very nearly insane I think). Even an incomplete pass stops the clock, so there's more to it than the simple success or failure of the play itself.

I think it's the worst play call I've ever seen. The Pats aren't particularly good at stopping the power run, and I think Pete Carroll still doesn't know what defense the Pats were in and all the explanations in the world coming out of that camp make no sense. They tried to get cute like they did at the end of the first half and it ended up biting them because Butler's apparently a precog.

 

[VORP Speed]

I heard that explanation from Pete and also thought that it all made sense except there is too much negative thinking involved. He's thinking if I pass on second down and it's incomplete (negative #1), then I'll run on third, and if Lynch is short, I call timeout and have a fourth down still. The positive thinking play is just give it to beast mode, who is your best offensive player, and has 102 yards and 4.3 YPC for the night. That is even though in 5 rushes from the one all year he had only one TD (wasn't it?). That 1 in 5 was not last night, when he was not thrown for a loss once and he was held to no gain twice. Pete overthought the thing. Thank heavens he thinks so fast on his feet. Any other coach would have handed the ball to Lynch, and we most likely lose. 

Perfect is the enemy of good

 

[Monbo Jumbo]

....
 
Time for a new paint job on the boat.

 
 
More likely, he gets a new boat. 

 

[DJnVa]

A few things:
 
1--We keep hearing that Lynch is 1 for 5 running from the 1 yard line. The converse is that teams ran on NE 6 times in that situation and scored 5 TDs.  BB not calling the TO was him hoping he could take at least 1 rushing attempt off the table.
 
 
2--I was listening to Scott Van Pelt while grabbing lunch. Literally within 3 minutes he made each of the following statements (paraphrasing): "BB not calling a TO was baffling and egregious" followed by "Had NE called timeout with about a minute left, Seattle can run it three times from the 1. If you're a NE fan do you feel confident they keep him out of the end zone?"
 
Well Scott, which is it?

 

[Jettisoned]

It's whichever one makes BB look the worst.

 

[crystalline]

 
And if you;re going to call a pass on second down, don't call THAT one. A one-yard slant at the goal line is bound to be thrown in tight quarters, which could yield a TD, a clean pick like what happened, a incompletion or a ball that's tipped and up for grabs. If you really don't want to run Lynch, roll Wilson right with three options: 1. Run it in if there's an opening: 2. Throw it if there's a receiver open of 3. If 1 and 2 aren't available, throw it into the fifth row.
 
GREAT play by Butler, though.

I thought this at first too.
Theres a good breakdown of the play here:
http://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/2uitcc/gif_breakdown_malcolm_butlers_final_superbowl/

The jam Browner put on Kearse is key, you see Butler barely dodging Kearse as he moves to jump the route.

I dont know what to think of the playcall now. However it seems like Wilson made a mistake here in trying to throw once Butler was clean.

Edit: in this clip you see where the DBs line up and how important Browners play is. http://www.gfycat.com/FragrantUnimportantFallowdeer

 

[SMU_Sox]

I thought this at first too.
Theres a good breakdown of the play here:
http://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/2uitcc/gif_breakdown_malcolm_butlers_final_superbowl/

The jam Browner put on Kearse is key, you see Butler barely dodging Kearse as he moves to jump the route.

I dont know what to think of the playcall now. However it seems like Wilson made a mistake here in trying to throw once Butler was clean.

Edit: in this clip you see where the DBs line up and how important Browners play is. http://www.gfycat.com/FragrantUnimportantFallowdeer

 
 

I don't think Wilson saw that Butler had a clean break.

 

[E5 Yaz]

Louis Riddick @LRiddickESPNhttps://twitter.com/LRiddickESPN · 6h6 hours ago


Look at tape of Malcolm Butler INT. Look at how deep Butler aligns off of Lockette. Think he didn't know what was coming? #smartfootball

 

[Gunfighter 09]

Except the Seahawks' stated reason for the play all was to run the clock down (which is very nearly insane I think). Even an incomplete pass stops the clock, so there's more to it than the simple success or failure of the play itself.

I think it's the worst play call I've ever seen. The Pats aren't particularly good at stopping the power run, and I think Pete Carroll still doesn't know what defense the Pats were in and all the explanations in the world coming out of that camp make no sense. They tried to get cute like they did at the end of the first half and it ended up biting them because Butler's apparently a precog.

No and No.

You CANNOT run the ball three times in 26 seconds with one timeout. The Pats are smart and would have ensured that it took at least ~15 seconds to unpile after an unsuccessful second down run, meaning they have to call their last timeout and thus have to pass on third down, then run on the last play of the game, 4th down. Planning for three shots at victory, Carroll had to pass once and chose to do it when it was most unpredictable.

Running the clock down makes a ton of sense when you consider the Hawks last playoff loss featured Matt Ryan beating them with :34 and two timeouts.

You seem to be advocating Carroll going all in with two Lynch runs vice two runs and one pass. Of course, the more I think about it, a rollout pass that puts Wilson's legs into the equation was probably a better individual play call than the slant.

 

[E5 Yaz]

Sports Science on the INT
 
http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=12267617

 

[Al Zarilla]

I thought this at first too.
Theres a good breakdown of the play here:
http://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/2uitcc/gif_breakdown_malcolm_butlers_final_superbowl/

The jam Browner put on Kearse is key, you see Butler barely dodging Kearse as he moves to jump the route.

I dont know what to think of the playcall now. However it seems like Wilson made a mistake here in trying to throw once Butler was clean.

Edit: in this clip you see where the DBs line up and how important Browners play is. http://www.gfycat.com/FragrantUnimportantFallowdeer

One of the analysts after the game said Wilson could have thrown the ball more into Lockette's body so nobody else could get to it. Good call, especially since it was such a short pass, Wilson could have done that. They showed the Brady TD pass to Gronk, in traffic, in the AFCCG as an example of perfect pinpointing on a short pass to absolutely prevent an INT. Brady > Wilson again. 

 

[Kevin Youkulele]

Watching live, I was baffled by the decision not to call a timeout and let the clock tick down toward 20 seconds.  I think the two key pieces are that Belichick decided it would be too hard to score even with a minute or so, and then that Seattle would be advantageously constrained in their choices for the reasons given above.  Maybe he even remembered that the CBs were prepared for a stack formation and the pick play Seattle liked to run out of it.  
 
What a sequence.  I was in disbelief when the interception happened.  

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Carroll is the fall guy here. Revell makes the call.....for Carroll to veto it and change the play you have to burn the timeout to get the proper personnel on the field or face a delay of game penalty/mass confusion in the huddle.

Carroll took the heat like a man while Revell threw his receiver under the bus.

 

[Just a bit outside]

No and No.

You CANNOT run the ball three times in 26 seconds with one timeout. The Pats are smart and would have ensured that it took at least ~15 seconds to unpile after an unsuccessful second down run, meaning they have to call their last timeout and thus have to pass on third down, then run on the last play of the game, 4th down. Planning for three shots at victory, Carroll had to pass once and chose to do it when it was most unpredictable.

Running the clock down makes a ton of sense when you consider the Hawks last playoff loss featured Matt Ryan beating them with :34 and two timeouts.

You seem to be advocating Carroll going all in with two Lynch runs vice two runs and one pass. Of course, the more I think about it, a rollout pass that puts Wilson's legs into the equation was probably a better individual play call than the slant.

I agree with the bolded.  That was the surprise decision.  You have the most mobile qb in the game and you don't give him a shot with more options. 

 

[mascho]

One of the analysts after the game said Wilson could have thrown the ball more into Lockette's body so nobody else could get to it. Good call, especially since it was such a short pass, Wilson could have done that. They showed the Brady TD pass to Gronk, in traffic, in the AFCCG as an example of perfect pinpointing on a short pass to absolutely prevent an INT. Brady > Wilson again. 

Yeah, I've got a piece in the pipeline for FC arguing that once the ball is snapped, the decision rests on Wilson. If he is gonna make that throw, he needs to put it to his back shoulder/second number and use Lockette as a wall between Butler and the ball. Make Butler drive through the WR.

Or, he needed to put it in the third row.

 

[snowmanny]

I thought this at first too.
Theres a good breakdown of the play here:
http://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/2uitcc/gif_breakdown_malcolm_butlers_final_superbowl/

The jam Browner put on Kearse is key, you see Butler barely dodging Kearse as he moves to jump the route.


I dont know what to think of the playcall now. However it seems like Wilson made a mistake here in trying to throw once Butler was clean.

Edit: in this clip you see where the DBs line up and how important Browners play is. http://www.gfycat.com/FragrantUnimportantFallowdeer

It's just an incredible defensive play. The Patriots were prepared for the play, essentially baited the Seahawks into the throw, and executed perfectly.
It's Browner and Butler making a great play, and on the flip side it's Wilson making a mistake. There is a questionable call by Carroll but,again, on the flip side the terrific coaching by Belichick and the New England staff is evident in that play as well.

 

[crystalline]

 
I don't think Wilson saw that Butler had a clean break.

Maybe, depending on tall guys on the line.
But even in that case he should have seen Butler as he was releasing the ball. And he should have done what Brady did when he saw his WR on the ground earlier in the game- hold on just a split second longer and throw the ball into the ground or at the WR's feet.

Summary: Brady > Wilson.

 

[Marciano490]

Yeah, I've got a piece in the pipeline for FC arguing that once the ball is snapped, the decision rests on Wilson. If he is gonna make that throw, he needs to put it to his back shoulder/second number and use Lockette as a wall between Butler and the ball. Make Butler drive through the WR.

Or, he needed to put it in the third row.

 
What about Lockette's body positioning?  Should he have boxed Butler out a bit more?

 

[soxfan121]

Carroll is the fall guy here. Revell makes the call.....for Carroll to veto it and change the play you have to burn the timeout to get the proper personnel on the field or face a delay of game penalty/mass confusion in the huddle.

Carroll took the heat like a man while Revell threw his receiver under the bus.

 
I concur. Carroll explained it as if he made the call; the HC does not make that call, the OC does. So, Carroll came off like a professional and Bevell probably took himself off the next wave of HC candidates. Bad call, even worse press reaction.

 

[wiffleballhero]

If Wilson puts the pass on the back shoulder it is not clear he gets in and the clock keeps running. Exactly the reason he led him -- to send him toward the end zone -- is the reason it got picked.
 
I get the call to throw, but you do wonder why that throw? 
 
Like a lot of things in this game, Seattle lives and now dies by going for the long shot play. They get 8 but number 9 did not work out.

 

[MentalDisabldLst]

What about Lockette's body positioning?  Should he have boxed Butler out a bit more?

 
I've seen a couple people say this, and I disagree.  If you look at the view from behind the offense in the Deadspin article (scroll down a bit), both Butler and Lockette have their shoulders squared to the incoming ball.  The bounce off each other's shoulders, not someone's chest.  That's about as much boxing out as you can ask for from a receiver.  If he had more than a few tenths of a second to react, maybe Lockette could have laid out to get an extra 6 inches of reach, and at least broken up the INT.  But Butler was approaching from a totally different angle, and was coming like a freight train.  I don't think there's a receiver on earth who could have stopped that INT once it left Wilson's hand.

 

[Harry Hooper]

I saw somewhere today that Lynch was 1/5 from the 1 yd line with two runs for losses. So there is that as well.

 
 
Also, the Pats had stoned Lynch on both a 3rd-and-2 and a 3rd-and-1 earlier in the game. This Lynch = automatic TD talk around the nation is out of hand.
 
Butler (and Browner) made great plays there on a pass that's almost impossible to stop.
 
Harrington is a fine nickelback, so it's notable that Butler had moved up in the coaches' eyes to top-3 DB for playing man coverage.
 
 
Having said all that, if I'm the Seahawks I have Wilson run a bootleg where he can either walk in to the end zone or wing the ball into the seats.

 

[geoduck no quahog]

Nice graphics from the NYT:
 
I can't paste them small enough here, so I won't - but they include:
 
1. Bird's Eye View
2. Wilson's View
3. Butler's View
4. Lockette's View

 

[reggiecleveland]

In retrospective, my failure to hit record after the game so I could rewatch the game was a major error

 

[Kevin Youkulele]

 
I've seen a couple people say this, and I disagree.  If you look at the view from behind the offense in the Deadspin article (scroll down a bit), both Butler and Lockette have their shoulders squared to the incoming ball.  The bounce off each other's shoulders, not someone's chest.  That's about as much boxing out as you can ask for from a receiver.  If he had more than a few tenths of a second to react, maybe Lockette could have laid out to get an extra 6 inches of reach, and at least broken up the INT.  But Butler was approaching from a totally different angle, and was coming like a freight train.  I don't think there's a receiver on earth who could have stopped that INT once it left Wilson's hand.

The NYT piece includes a statement from Lockette that he did not see Butler coming, and it makes sense: he'd have to have great peripheral vision to see Butler if his eyes were on Wilson/the ball.  I agree, there probably was no way for him to stop it. 

 

[E5 Yaz]

Playcallgate
 
http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/12268853/seattle-seahawks-coach-pete-carroll-denies-reports-changed-goal-line-interception-play-run-pass

 

[Remagellan]

In retrospective, my failure to hit record after the game so I could rewatch the game was a major error

 
 
The NFL Network will rebroadcast the game in its entirety at some point this week.  It just won't have the halftime show and all the commercials.  

 

[HriniakPosterChild]

 
I concur. Carroll explained it as if he made the call; the HC does not make that call, the OC does. So, Carroll came off like a professional and Bevell probably took himself off the next wave of HC candidates. Bad call, even worse press reaction.

Stories in the Seattle paper (and I'm on mobile, so sorry, no links) say the PC told his OC, "Throw the ball," and the OC chose the play and sent it in.

 

[Monbo Jumbo]

Nice graphics from the NYT:
 
I can't paste them small enough here, so I won't - but they include:
 
1. Bird's Eye View
2. Wilson's View
3. Butler's View
4. Lockette's View

That's pretty cool.
 

 
 
IN BUTLER’S WORDS “I saw Wilson looking over there. He kept his head still and just looked over there, so that gave me a clue. And the stacked receivers; I just knew they were going to throw. I don’t know how I knew. I just knew. I just beat him to the point and caught the ball.”

Maybe the only thing better than human intuition is the results of people who trust their intuition. 

 

[Bernie Carbohydrate]

Carroll's explanation puzzles me.  He claims they called the pass because NE came out in a goal line set. But with the ball on the one yard line and less than a minute to go that is the most likely formation, right? I mean, the Pats weren't going to come out in a dime.